Two Muslim-Christian Debates From The Early Shl'Ite Tradition

Journal of Semitic Studies XXX1II// Spring
TWO MUSLIM-CHRISTIAN DEBATES

FROM THE EARLY SHl'ITE TRADITION
DAVID THOMAS
CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
The Kitdb al-Tawhid of Abu Ja'far Muhammad b. 'All Ibn
Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Babawayh al-Qumml is the earliest surviving compendium of
theological discussions from a ShTite author. It was written
some time in the middle of the fourth/tenth century, although a
definite date cannot be given owing to the scarcity of details
about Ibn Babawayh's life. The few known facts are that he was
the son of a recognized Shfite authority,1 and was himself an
acknowledged expert, that he travelled to Baghdad in 355/966,
and died in 381/991—2. He was a prolific author, and left over
three hundred works on legal and theological topics.2
Like other fourth/tenth century theological works, such as
the Kitdb al-Tambtd of al-Baqillanl and the Mughnt of 'Abd al-
Jabbar, Ibn Babawayh's Kitdb al-Tawbid1 contains a series of
chapters dealing with the nature of God and his relationship
with the created world. But Ibn Babawayh's method differs
considerably from that of his Sunnite contemporaries. For in
place of the rigorous reasoning that pervades the works of al-
Baqillanl and 'Abd al-Jabbar, he resorts to the authoritative
utterances of the Shfite imams. In fact, the K. al-Tawbid is
as much a defence of the inspired status of the imams as it
is an examination of the theological questions discussed in
Ibn Babawayh's time. This feature of the work is especially
pronounced in two chapters concerned with the relationship
between Islam and Christianity. Both purport to be records of
debates between early Christians and Muslims, and in each of
1 Cf. Ibn al-Nadlm, K. al-Fibrist, cd. G. Fliigel (Leipzig 1872), 196 11. 5-8.
2
Cf. Muhammad b. al-Hasan al TusI, Fibrist, ed. A. Sprenger et at.
(Calcutta 1853-5), 3°6; B. Dodge (tr.), The Fibrist of al-Nadlm (New York
1970), 487, n. 188, 488 (neither Flugel nor Tajaddud (Tehran 1971) contains
this reference which Dodge finds in the Tonk MS). Biographical details in
EP art. 'Ibn Babawayh' (A. A. A. Fyzee).
3
Ed. H. al-Husaynl al-Tihranl (Tehran 1387 A.H.).
53
them imams appear as inspired figures: in the first as the ultimate

authority who convinces a Christian of the truth of Shf ism, and
in the second as the debating partner who reduces his Christian
opponent to silence. Both chapters, if authentic, are among the
earliest recorded exchanges between Muslims and Christians.
For this reason, as well as the intrinsic interest of details in each
of them, they are given below in translation.
The first of the two chapters, no. 37 in the K. al-Tawbid
(pp. 270—5), is entitled 'The refutation of those who say that
God is the third of three, and that there is only one God'. 4 It is
the account of a debate between the Muslim theologian Hisham

b. al-Hakam and Bariha, a Christian patriarch, on the problem
of the relationship between God the Father and God the Son.
But this is only a preparation for Barlha's conversion to Islam at
the hands of Ja'far al-Sadiq after his defeat in the debate and his
discovery of the imams as repositories of divine truth:
[270] My father, God have mercy upon him, said: Ahmad b. Idris and
Muhammad b. Yahya al-'Attar told me from Muhammad b. Ahmad
from Ibrahim b. Hashim from Muhammad b. Hammad from al-Hasan
b. Ibrahim from Yunus b. 'Abd al-Rahman from Hisham b. al-
Hakam5 from one of the patriarchs of the Christians:
This man was called Bariha, and he had been a Christian patriarch
for seventy years. He had made a study of Islam, and of those who
argued against it from reading its books and also knew the qualities,
tokens and signs of the Messiah. My father said: He knew so much
about this that he had grown famous among Christians, Muslims,
4
Cf. sura 5.73. The dialogue is quoted from the K. al-Tawbid by
Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Bibar al-anwar X, ed. Jawad al-'AlawI and
Muhammad al-Akhwandi (Tehran n.d.), 234-9. Significant textual variations
are noted below. These, however, are not very many, so despite the
existence of two versions the text is difficult to follow in places. The
translations of this and the other dialogue below attempt to convey the
likely sense where this is not fully apparent in the texts.
5
All these figures appear in other isnads in the K. al-Tawbid but nowhere
else together. Ibn Babawayh's father and his two immediate sources are
frequently listed together and evidently formed a group, but the earlier
figures only appear together in one or two other places (e.g. pp. 295 11. i6f.,
343 11. 1-3, 368 11. 12-14). This pattern is partly explained by TusI {Fibrist,
19) who says that the fourth person in the isnad, Ibrahim b. Hashim (a pupil
of the fifth person, Yunus b. 'Abd al-Rahman, who was a contemporary of
the imam Ja'far, cf. Ahmad b. 'All al-Najashl, Kijdl (Bombay 1317), 12, 311)
moved from Kufa to Qumm and was the first to transmit baditbs from the
one place to the other. MajlisI, Bibar, 234 11. 13 f., gives the first part of the
isnad as follows: my father, from Ahmad b. Idris and Muhammad al-*Attar,
from al-Ash'arl, from Ibn Hashim from Muhammad b. Hammad.
54
Jews and Magians. The Christians boasted about him and said: Even
if there had only ever been Barlha in the Christian religion, he would
have satisfied us. [271] But in spite of all this he still sought after the
truth and Islam.
With him was a woman who had been in his service for a long
time. He used to confide to her the weakness of Christianity and its
arguments. My father said: So she came to know about this from
him. Barlha investigated the matter thoroughly, and started to ask
Muslim groups and different parties in Islam about their most
knowledgeable representatives. He began to ask about the leaders6 of
the Muslims, their pious and expert men, and their best intellects, and
would investigate group after group. But he gained no satisfaction

from their members and concluded by saying: 'If your leaders were
leaders in truth then you would possess some truth'. Then the Shfites
were suggested to him, and Hisham b. al-Hakam.7
Yunus b. 'Abd al-Rahman said, Hisham said to me: While I was

seated in my shop in Karkh 8 with people around me reading out the
Qur'an for me, suddenly there appeared a crowd of Christians, both
priests and others, about a hundred men all in black with hooded
cloaks, and among them was the chief patriarch Barlha. They stopped
around my shop and my chair was offered to Barlha. He sat on it and
the bishops and monks stood around leaning on their staffs, their
hooded cloaks over their heads.
Barlha began: 'Of all the Muslims who can present arguments
intelligently there is not one with whom I have not debated Chris-
tianity, and none of them has anything to say. So I have come to
debate Islam with you'.
He said: Hisham laughed and replied: 'Barlha, if you require signs
from me like the signs of the Messiah, then I am not the Messiah, nor
like him, nor even near him. He was an unblemished, unworldly and
exalted spirit, his signs were evident, his tokens clear'.
Bariha: "These words and this explanation please me'.
6
In Arabic imams. Ibn Babawayh may well intend irony here, since
Barihafinallydiscovers an imam who convinces him that he possesses truth.
7
Hisham b. al-Hakam was well-known as a theologian in the middle of
the second century (d. 179/796 or a few years later). He had strong Shl*ite
sympathies, and was especially associated with the imams Ja'far al-Sadiq and
Musi al-Ka?im. He was also a shopkeeper (El2, s.v. (W. Madelung);
W. M. Watt, Tbe Formative Period of Islamic Thought (Edinburgh 1973),
i86ff.).
8
The Bab al-Karkh was the market quarter of Baghdad. It predated the
'Abbasid capital, which was established by al-Man$ur in 145/762, and would
have provided a suitable location for merchants moving to Baghdad under
the new rule (cf. G. Le Strange, Baghdad during tbe Abbasid Caliphate (Oxford
1900), 63ff.; El2 art. 'al-Karkh' (M. Streck-J. Lassner).
55
Hisham: 'If you want a dispute then this is the place'.
Bariha: 'Yes, and I will ask you whether there in any physical
connection between this prophet of yours and the Messiah'.
Hisham: 'He is the descendant of the paternal uncle of the
Messiah's mother's ancestors, since the Messiah is the descendant of
Ishaq and Muhammad the descendant of Isma'lT.
Bariha: 'What do you say of his connection with his father?'
Hisham: 'If [272] you want the relationship that you accept I will
tell you. Or if you want the relationship that we accept I will tell you
that'.
Bariha: 'I want the relationship that we accept - I believe that I
have beaten him if he gives the relationship that we do, since I said,

Give the relationship we give'.
Hisham: 'Yes. You say that he is Eternal from Eternal.9 But which
is the Father and which is the Son?'
Bariha: 'The Son is the one who descended to earth'. 10
Hisham: 'The Father is the one who descended to earth'.
Bariha: 'The Son is the Father's delegate'.11
Hisham: 'The Father must be wiser than the Son because the world
is the creation of the Father'.
Bariha: 'The world is the creation of both the Father and the Son'.
Hisham: 'Then what prevents them descending together just as
they both created, if they share equally?'
Bariha: 'How can they share equally when they are one thing,
though separated in name?'
Hisham: 'Though united in name'.
Bariha: 'That is an ignorant argument'.
Hisham: 'It is a traditional argument'.
Bariha: 'But the Son is joined to the Father'.
Hisham: 'No, the Son is divided from the Father'.
Bariha: "This is different from what people understand'.
Hisham: 'If what people understand is to be advanced as evidence,
then I have beaten you because the Father existed when the Son did
not. Do you not say this, Bariha?'
Bariha: 'I do not'.
Hisham: 'Then why do you cite people whose evidence you will
not accept yourself?'12
9
A distant reference to the Nicene Creed.
10
MajlisI, Bibar, 236 1. 3 omits this reply, possibly because it appears to
serve no purpose.
11
Bariha somewhat clumsily uses the term rasul.
12
Hisham turns the argument back on Bariha by apparently appealing to
the subordinationist belief of the Arians, which he cites above, p. 272 1. 11,
under the clear impression that it is a belief current among some Christians.
Thus he neutralizes Bariha's argument that only what a consensus of what
56
Bariha: '"The Father" is a name and "the Son" is a name by which

the Eternal One is appraised'.13
Hisham: 'Are the two names eternal like the eternity of the Father
and the Son?'
Bariha: 'No, rather the names are originated'.
Hisham: 'Then you have made the Father a son and the Son a
father. If the Son alone originated these names, then he is the Father.
And if the Father alone originated them, then he is the Father and so
is the Son, and there is no Son'.14
Bariha: '"The Son" is the name of the Spirit when it descended to
earth'.15 [273]
Hisham: 'So what was its name when it had not yet descended to

earth?'
Bariha: 'Its name was "Son" whether it had descended or not'.
Hisham: "Thus, before the descent this whole Spirit was one and its
name was two'.
Bariha: 'It was all one, a single Spirit'.
Hisham: 'But you are content to make part of it Son and part
Father'.
Bariha: 'No, because the name of the Father and the name of the
Son are one'.
Hisham: 'So the Son is father of the Father and the Father is father
of the Son, and the Father and the Son are one'.16
The bishops said loudly to Bariha, 'No-one has ever treated you as
disdainfully as this man; arise'. Indeed, Bariha was confused; he made
Christians believe is acceptable by citing a majority belief different from

Barlha's own.
13
The text, p. 272 1. 13, reads ismj.q.d.r. bibi al-qadlm. One MS and Bihar,
236 1. 11, read ism bi-qudrati al-qadim, suggesting that the meaning of the
phrase is that the two divine names indicate God's power in his dealings
with his creatures. It is thus possible that the phrase as it appears in the text
should be translated 'name by which the Eternal One disposes (juqaddiru)''.
Neither of these possibilities is entirely satisfactory, and so the meaning
suggested in the translation is that the divine names are nothing more than
human conventions (since Bariha does not claim they are eternal) by which
God is comprehended or understood {juqaddaru bibi) in his dealings with
created beings.
14
The point of this argument is that whichever Being originated the
names is the real deity. In whatever case there is only one deity, so that
cither the so-called Son is really the true God or the so-called Father is the
true God.
15
Bariha uses the inappropriate term rub, generally used for the Holy
Spirit rather than the full Godhead (cf. 273 11. 2f.).
16
As the text stands the last clause reads 'and the Son is one'. The sense
is improved by inserting with Bibir, 236 1. 20, 'fa-al-ab' which may easily
have been omitted in transmission.
57
to get up but Hisham held him back saying, 'What hinders you from
Islam? Do you feel hatred in your heart? Say so, otherwise I shall ask
you one question about Christianity. You can ponder over it during
the night and in the morning you will find you have nothing more
important than me'. The bishops said, 'Have nothing to do with such
a question in case it should throw you into doubt'.
But Barlha said, 'Ask it, expert one!'
Hisham: 'Do you agree that the Son knows what is with the
Father?'
Barlha: 'Yes'.
Hisham: 'Do you agree that the Father knows all that is with the
Son?'

Bariha: 'Yes'.
Hisham: 'Are you prepared to say of die Son that he is capable of
undertaking all of which the Father is capable?'
Bariha: 'Yes'.
Hisham: 'Are you prepared to say of the Father that he is capable
of all that the Son is?'
Barlha: 'Yes'.
Hisham: 'Then why is one of them the son of his companion,
although they are equal? And why does each of them treat the other
unjustly?'
Barlha: 'There is no injustice between them'.
Hisham: "The truth of the matter is that the Son is father of the
Father, and the Father son of the Son. Think about that, Barlha'.
The Christians went away wishing that they had not set eyes upon
Hisham or his companions.
My father said: Bariha returned distressed and anxious to his home.
The woman who served him asked, 'Why do I see you anxious and
distressed?' So he told her about the argument that had taken place
between Hisham and himself. She said to Barlha, 'Alas for you! Do
you prefer truth or error?' He replied, 'Truth, of course'. She said,
'Wherever you find truth pursue it. And beware of obstinacy, for
obstinacy is doubt and doubt brings disaster, since doubters go to
hell'. My father said: He accepted what she said and resolved to
return to Hisham. So he returned without any of his companions, and
said: 'Hisham, do you have someone from whose thought you take
your own, and from whose words you derive your own, and to
whom you are obedient?'
Hisham: 'Yes, Barlha'.
Barlha: 'What [274] qualities does he have?'
Hisham: 'In himself or in his religion?'
Bariha: 'In them both, his own qualities and those of his religion'.
Hisham: 'As for his ancestry it is the best: pre-eminent among the
Arabs, elite among Quraysh and superior among the Banu Hashim.
58
Everyone who challenges him about his ancestry finds that he is

superior to himself since the Quraysh are the most excellent of the
Arabs and the Banu Hashim the most excellent of the Quraysh. The
most excellent of the Banu Hashim is one particular man, one pious
man, a lord. Likewise, the descendants of the lord are more excellent
than the descendants of others, and he is one of the lord's descen-
dants'.
Barlha: 'Describe his religion'.
Hisham: 'The discipline he follows or his particular personal
holiness?'
Barlha: 'His particular personal holiness'.
Hisham: 'He is sinless since he commits no sin, generous since he

has no avarice, brave since he has no fear, without need of more
knowledge since he is not ignorant, a guardian of religion standing by
its injunctions; he is from the stock of the prophets, the collector of
the prophets' wisdom; he is gentle where is anger, and acts justly
where there is wrong; he helps secure agreement, and establishes
right before friend and enemy; he makes no excessive demands in
respect of his enemy and does not impede advantage to his friend. He
acts according to the revealed teaching and talks about miraculous
things; he is one of the pious. He relates the sayings of imams, sincere
friends, and no argument ever confounds him; he is never ignorant of
a question, gives opinions on every religious practice, and reveals all
that is dark'.
Barlha: 'You have delineated the Messiah with all his traits, and
have attested his proofs and signs, although as a person this man is
distinct from him and the description of him stands clear from his. So
if the description is true I shall believe in this person'.
Hisham: 'If you believe you are on the right course, and if you
follow the truth, you cannot be blamed'. Then he added, 'Barlha,
God did not set out any proof at the beginning of his creation that he
did not provide at its middle or end, and the proofs have not become
void. But the religions have not believed, and neither have the
religious practices'.
Barlha: 'This is very near the truth, and close to sincerity; it is a
quality of the wise to establish proofs that the doubting deny'.
Hisham: 'Yes'.
The two men then travelled to Medina, the woman with them, and
enquired for Abu 'Abdallah.17 They found Musa b. Ja'far, and
Hisham told him [275] the story. When he had finished, Musa b.
Ja'far said: 'Barlha, how well do you know your Book?'
He replied: 'I know it thoroughly'.
Musa asked: 'What expertise in its interpretation do you have?'
17
Sc. Ja'rar al-Sadiq.
59
Bariha answered: 'No one has more thorough knowledge of this

than F.
My father said: So Musa b. Ja'far began to recite the Gospel.
Bariha exclaimed: "The Messiah used to recite it like this, and only the
Messiah gave this recitation'. He added, 'I have been seeking you or
someone like you for fifty years'. My father said: So he came to
believe, and was sincere in doing so. The woman did likewise, and
was equally sincere in her belief. So Hisham, Bariha and the woman
went in to Abu 'Abdallah, and Hisham related the story and the
discussion that had taken place between Musa and Bariha. Abu
'Abdallah remarked: '"They were descendants one of the other, and
God is the Hearer and Knower"'.18

Bariha said: 'My humble apologies, sir, but from where have you
obtained the Torah, the Gospel and the books of the prophets?'
Abu 'Abdallah replied: 'We have the books as a legacy from them.
We recite them as they did, and pronounce them as they did. For God
does not place a sign in his world of the kind that, when someone
asks about something, the reply comes: I do not know'.
Bariha became a follower of Abu 'Abdallah until the latter died.
Then he followed Musa b. Ja'far until he himself died in his time.
Musa washed him, prepared him for the grave and buried him, all
with his own hands. He said, 'This was one of the followers of the
Messiah, who knew God's truth about him'. He added, 'It is my hope
that more of his companions might be like him'.
This encounter between Hisham and Bariha is not difficult to
date, within certain limits. The latest it could have occurred is
148/765, the year in which Ja'far al-Sadiq died. But since Bariha
was clearly in extreme old age when he was converted, having
already been patriarch for an amazing seventy years (p. 270
1. 12), and cannot have had many years left before he too died,
it is likely that his fateful meeting with Hisham did not take
place much before this year. So if he was converted sometime
between 140/757 and 148/765, he could have followed Ja'far
and then Musa, and finally have died without achieving an
improbably great age. A date in the 140s (ca. 760) thus fits in
best with the details of the story. 19
It is known that Hisham b. al-Hakam was a merchant as well
as an intellectual and that he moved from his native Kufa to
Baghdad sometime in the mid-second/eighth century. 20 Ibn
18
Cf. sura 3.34.
19
If Hishim moved to Baghdad in order to trade with the populace of
the new capital, he would have done so in about 145/760. This narrows the
period even further.
20
Cf. W a t t , Formative Period, 186 a n d refs.
60
Babawayh portrays him as a shopkeeper and teacher of the

Qur'an in what would then have been the business quarter of
the new 'Abbasid capital (p. 271 11. j(.). So, on these details his
account agrees with independent evidence, suggesting that there
is a firm basis of fact beneath the chapter as a whole.
The opposite conclusion, however, is suggested by other
details, which raise the important question of the historicity of
the events recorded in the chapter. Two aspects in particular
provoke most suspicion. These are the person of Barlha and the
whole character of the episode narrated by Ibn Babawayh.
Firstly, it is difficult to imagine Barlha really as the leading

Christian theologian he is claimed to be. For, despite his
acknowledged expertise in Christianity and Islam, as well as his
long practice in debate, he puts up a particularly poor showing
before Hisham. And it is hardly persuasive to imagine that after
all his polemical experience he has never encountered arguments
like those presented by his opponent. One is led to believe that
he is purposely made to present a weak case in order to make
Hisham's arguments all the stronger.
In addition, the person of Barlha is unknown outside this
chapter. If he was, in fact, patriarch of the Christians and
resided at Baghdad in the mid-second/eighth century, then he
would have been an elder contemporary of the Nestorian
patriarch Timothy, who was elected to the metropolitan see in
163/780 and held it until his death in 208/823. But he is neither
mentioned by Timothy himself nor in accounts of him by later
writers. While it is conceivable that all references to such an
eminent traitor to Christianity were expunged from the records,
it is difficult to imagine that no one except Ibn Babawayh,
neither earlier Muslims nor Christians from other sects, should
know of his conversion and wish to publicize it as a source of
embarrassment.
The name Barlha itself is, moreover, not known elsewhere.
This suggests that it is either a corruption of a Christian name
or an invention. It is possible that if it is a corruption it derives
from such a name as Bahrlz, since in Arabic the two are not
dissimilar, allowing for metathetical confusion. A bishop named
'Abd Yasu' b. Bahrlz is mentioned by two fourth/tenth century
writers: cAbd al-Jabbar refers to a letter of his, and calls him
bishop of Mosul,21 while Ibn al-Nadlm indicates that he lived in
21
'Abd al-Jabbar, Tatbbit dala'il al-nubuwa, ed. 'A.-K. 'Uthman (Beirut
n.d.), 146 11. 4fF., where his name is printed BahrTn.
61
the reign of the caliph al-Ma'mun.22 This individual could not,

therefore, have participated in a dialogue before 150/767, but
his name may have been well enough known at the time Ibn
Babawayh was engaged on this chapter for him to use it in a
corrupt form.23
Whatever the case, the identity of this bishop raises problems
for the historicity of the events reported by Ibn Babawayh. But
the second aspect of the chapter, namely its whole character and
atmosphere, presents much greater difficulties for historical
accuracy, and leads to scepticism about claims that it is the
account of a real meeting. First of all, it is quite clear that the

main purpose of the chapter is to demonstrate the unique
authority of the imams, both as saintly individuals and as
inspired teachers. This theme appears early on, when Barlha
discovers that the 'imams' of the various Muslim groups he
encounters compel no response from him (p. 271 11.3-6). It
recurs in a positive form when Barlha returns to Hisham and
the latter tells him about the person from whom he takes his
learning. Barlha recognizes this person as a Messiah-like figure
(pp. 273 1. 23-274 1. 19). Then, when he meets Musa al-Kazim
in Medina he discovers at first hand that the line of imams
possesses revealed knowledge (p. 275 11. 1—4, 8—10). Ibn Baba-
wayh reinforces the point throughout the chapter, both by
remarking on Barlha's dissatisfaction with the faith he has
represented for years (pp. 270 1. 15—271 1. 6, 273 11. 18—22), and
by demonstrating in the debate that arguments derived from
imams actually expose the weakness of even those presented by
experienced polemicists. Thus his whole chapter provides illus-
trations of the superiority of the imams and the insufficiency of
all other modes of belief.
Thematic organization of this kind suggests a careful artistic
arrangement. The second point about the character and atmos-
phere of the chapter is that the personalities seem to come from
a story rather than a report which is supposed to have been
passed down through a line of transmitters. In particular,
Barlha's internal doubts about his faith and his complaints to his
housekeeper possess dramatic force. And other features, such as
the picture created by Barlha's companions standing menacingly
22
Fibrist, 23 11. 32f., 2 4 4 11. -jf., 248 1. 2 7 , 249 1. 4. Cf. G . Graf, Gtscbicbte
der Cbristlicben Arabiscben Uteratur (Rome 1944-53), II, ii9f.
23
Marl b. Sulayman, Fatarika kursial-masbriq, ed. H. Gismondi, pars prior
(Rome 1899), refers to a bishop of al-Baria, a see near Mosul.
62
silent outside Hisham's shop, Hisham's jocularity, and the final

climactic appearance of the imam Ja'far as the goal of Barlha's
long search, are all ingredients of narrative. It cannot be
doubted that Ibn Babawayh, or his immediate source, possessed
a strong feel for story-telling.
All this being so, it is impossible to accept the account
contained in the chapter as the straightforward historical
records of a second-century debate and its consequences. The
greater likelihood is that it was composed long after with the
main intention of illustrating the unique authority of the ShTite
imams. Of course, the chapter may contain relatively early

material which Ibn Babawayh subordinated to his main inten-
tion. Thus if the central debate between Hisham and Barlha
(pp. 271 1. 17—273 1. 16) does, in fact, date from the mid-second/
eighth century, it is one of the earliest surviving examples
of Muslim-Christian polemic, predating the dialogue between
Timothy and al-Mahdi" by over twenty years, and the first
surviving Muslim polemical treatises by about fifty years.24 But it
is not at all easy to know whether the arguments attributed here
to Hisham and his opponent do reflect polemic in ca. 150/767.
For there is almost nothing from this time with which to
compare it. The earliest sustained arguments date from around
the year 200/815-16, but they often centre on the Qur'an-
inspired accusation that Christians believed Jesus was the
human son of the divine God. Thus the main subject of their
attacks was the problem of connecting the eternal with the
contingent, or Creator with the created. Ibn Babawayh's two
contestants argue over the more philosophical question of how
the two divine beings can be distinguished from each other but
can also be equal and identical.
One brief scrap of evidence does given support to an early date
for an argument of this kind. It is a criticism by an early third/
ninth century Mu'tazilite, Abu Ja'far Muhammad b. 'Abdallah
al-Iskafl (d. ca. 240), which survives in a short quotation
from the K. Awd'il al-adilla of the late third/ninth century
Mu'tazilite Abu al-Qasim 'Abdallah b. Ahmad al-Balkhl. On the
subject of the Father and the Son, al-Iskafl says to Christian
opponents: Does not the Father have a Son? They reply: Yes.
24
The dialogue took place in 165/781. The refutations of such figures as
al-Qasim b. Ibrahim al-Hasanl, 'Ali b. Rabban al-Tabarl, Abu 'Uthman
al-Jahiz and Abu 'Isa al-Warraq were written in the first decades of the
third/ninth century.
63
He continues: And the Son, is there no son to him? They reply:

No. So al-Iskafi says: How then can he who has a Son be he
who does not have a son, and how can it be possible that the
Son is other than divine?25
The main point of both this brief interchange, which dates
from around 200/815, and the arguments presented by Ibn
Babawayh, which supposedly date from fifty or so years earlier,
is that it is paradoxical on the one hand to identify Father and
Son as a single divine Being, while on the other attributing
different characteristics to them. Either the distinction between
them must be artificial or they cannot both be God. Al-Iskafi

bases his attack on the logic of identical relationships, while
Hisham bases his on the logic of identical actions.26 This
similarity shows that arguments of the kind reported by Ibn
Babawayh were in use in the second/eighth and third/ninth
centuries. It may also be significant that there is no mention of
the Holy Spirit in either writer.27 In fact, Bariha uses the term
'spirit', rub, to designate the whole Godhead (pp. 272 1. 17-273
1. 3).28 This absence may be an indication that they were
influenced by the polemic of the Qur'an against beliefs that God
had a Son, rather than Christian teaching about the Trinity. The
resort to Muslim sources of information suggests either an early
date when the Qur'an was both more easily accessible than
Christian books and regarded as more authoritative, or a
conservative attitude which preferred the Qur'an to foreign
sources. A third sign of possible earliness is that neither Hisham
nor Bariha makes use of such terms as uqnum, sifa (in connection
with God) or jawbar, which in later polemic became fixed
definitions of the Godhead.
25
P . Sbath, Vingt traitis pbilosopbiques tt apologitiquts dauteurs arabes
cbritiens (Cairo 1929), 65 11. 7-10.
26
Another example of the principle that identical beings must act
identically occurs at the beginning of the attack on the Incarnation by Abu
*Isa al-Warraq (d. 247/861), al-Kadd 'ala al-tbalatb firaq min aJ-Nasard, ed. A.
Abel (Brussels 1949), 1-6, paras i-x. Abu 'Isa argues that if the Son is
identical with the Father and the Holy Spirit, then they, like him, should
have descended to earth. This is similar to Hisham's argument on p. 272 11.
3 ff., but involves all three Persons of the Trinity.
27
The excerpts from IskafT preserved by Balkhl are, however, extremely
brief.
28
This may seem an impossible usage for a Christian, although it is
attested by al-MaturidT, K. al-Ta»bid, ed. F. Kholeif (Beirut 1970), 210 11. 12-
15, in what may be a garbled report from Christians.
64
None of these features is a decisive proof of earliness. They

simply indicate that Ibn Babawayh's report could fit into the
early period. With so many factors suggesting that the chapter
as a whole was composed as a narrative and not written down
as received, judgement on this portion must be suspended.
More will be said about it later, after examining the other
chapter concerning Christianity in Ibn Babawayh's work.
This chapter, no. 65 in the Kitab al-Tawhtd, is entitled 'The
Report of the Meeting between al-Rida 'All b. Musa (peace be
upon them both), and the religious leaders and representatives
of theological opinion, such as the Patriarch, the Exilarch, the

Leaders of the Sabaeans, and the Great Hirbadh; and what
'Imran the Sabaean said about belief in God's unity before
al-Ma'mun'. It is a much longer chapter than the previous one,
and actually has as its main character the imam 'All al-Rida, who
debates with each representative in turn. Only his interchange
with the Patriarch (pp. 417-27) is translated here:29
[417] Abu Muhammad Ja'far b. 'AH b. Ahmad al-Qumml and also al-
Ilaql the jurist, God have mercy upon him, told me: Abu Muhammad
al-Hasan b. Muhammad b. 'AH b. Sadaqa al-Qumml told me that Abu
'Amr Muhammad b. 'Umar b. 'Abd al-'Aziz al-Ansari al-KajjI told
him from one who heard al-Hasan b. Muhammad al-Nawfall and also
al-Hashiml30 say:
When 'All b. Musa al-Rida, peace be upon them both, came to
al-Ma'mun,31 the latter ordered al-Fadl b. Sahl32 to assemble before
29
T h e d i a l o g u e also a p p e a r s in I b n B a b a w a y h ' s TJyurt akbbar al-Rida, e d .
M.M. al-Sayyid Hasan al-Khurasan (Najaf 1970), I, part 1, 126-33. This ' s
evidently the earlier of the two works, since Ibn Babawayh refers to it twice
in K. al-Tawbid (j) 1. 8 and 122 1. 2). Al-MajlisI quotes this earlier version in
Bihar al-anwar, X, 299-307. Important textual variations are noted below (cf.
n. 4 above). The introduction to the dialogue, up to the point at which the
debate actually begins, is repeated in Bibar, XLIX, ed. Muhammad al-Baqir
al-Bahbudl (Tehran 1385), 173-5.
30
The transmitters of this account are not well-known elsewhere. Ibn
Babawayh himself cites the first alone on p. 88 1. 4, and all five in one other
isnad, on p. 441 11. 16-19. Among other writers only Abu 'Amr Muhammad
b. 'Umar b. 'Abd al-'Aziz appears to be known (NajashI, Kijdl, 263 11. 9-12;
TusI, Fibrist, 309 11. 4-8). He was a pupil of the third century scholar Abu
al-Nasr Muhammad b. Mas'ud b. 'Ayyash, and the audior of a Shi*ite
biographical work (El2 art. 'al-'AyyashF (B. Lewis)).
31
Ma'mun declared 'All his heir and successor in Ramadan 202/817. The
imam came to Merv from Medina, and remained with the caliph until his
sudden death in 203/815, possibly poisoned by Ma'mun.
32
Al-Fadl b . Sahl was M a ' m u n ' s vizier a n d m e n t o r . H e w a s assassinated
in Sha'ban 202/818.
65
him the representatives of theological opinion, such as the Patriarch,
the Exilarch, the leaders of the Sabaeans, the Great Hirbadh, the
leaders of the Zoroastrians, Qustas the Greek and the Muslim
disputants, so that he might hear al-Rida's arguments and theirs.33 So
al-Fadl b. Sahl gathered them together and informed [418] al-Ma'mun
that he had done so. Al-Ma'mun said, 'Bring them in to me', which
al-Fadl did, and al-Ma'mun welcomed them. Then he said to them, 'I
have brought you together for a worthy purpose, for I wish you to
hold debate with my uncle's son, this man from Medina who has just
arrived. Come back tomorrow, and let none of you be absent'. They
replied, 'To hear is to obey, O Commander of the Faithful. We shall
return in the morning if God wills'.

Al-Hasan b. Muhammad al-Nawfall said: While we were holding
conversation with Abu al-Hasan al-Rida the servant Yasir entered -
he had taken charge of Abu al-Hasan's welfare — and said, 'My Lord,
the Commander of the Faithful sends you greetings and says, Your
brother salutes you; the representatives of religious opinion, the
leaders of the various religions and disputants from all the faiths have
gathered together before me. Therefore, please come to us tomorrow
morning if you should wish to hold debate with them. If not, do not
attempt such a difficult thing. Should you want us to come to you,
that is a small thing for us'. Abu al-Hasan replied, 'Return my
greetings to him and say, I understand what you desire, and I shall be
with you tomorrow if God wills'.
Al-Hasan b. Muhammad al-Nawfall said: When Yasir had left, he
turned to me and said, 'O Nawfall, you are from Iraq, and the Iraqi
sensitivity is not blunt; what do you think about your cousin's34
action of gathering together before me [419] associators and those
who represent varying opinions?' I replied, 'My humble service to
you, sir. He wants to test you, and desires to find out about you. But
he has built upon infirm and weak foundations, for it is God who
builds'. He said to me, 'Then what construction does he intend here?'
I said, 'The representatives of innovation and disputation are not
scholars, because the scholar disproves what is destructive. But the
representatives of opinion, the disputants and the associators are
destructive and lying. If you presented before them the argument that
God is one they would say, His oneness is true. And if you said,
Muhammad is the Apostle of God, God's blessing and peace be upon
13
These leaders represent the Christians, Jews, Sabaeans, Magians,
Zoroastrians, Greek philosophers, and Islamic theologians. The Greek is
named Nustas in 'Ujun, 126 1. 17, Bibar, X, 299 1. 10, and Bibar, XLIX,
173 1. 11.
34
According to the opening isnad, 417 1. 8, al-Nawfall was a Hashimite,
and as a descendant to Nawfal b. 'Abd al-Manaf, uncle of the Prophet's
grandfather, he would righdy be regarded as a relative of the caliph.
66
him and his family, they would say, His apostolic status is assured.
But then they will suddenly bewilder the very man who has discred-
ited them with his arguments, and will force him to make mistakes
until he abandons his views. So be on your guard - my humble
service is yours'.
He said: He smiled and then said, 'O Nawfall, are you afraid that
they will be able to resist my arguments?' I replied, 'No, for God
alone is sufficient for you, and I trust that God will give you victory
over them, if he so wills'. He asked me, 'O Nawfall, do you wish to
know when al-Ma'mun will be sorry?' I answered, 'Yes'. He said,
'When he hears my arguments against the people of the Torah
according to their Torah, against the people of the Gospel according

to their Gospel, against the people of the Psalms according to their
Psalms, against the Sabaeans according to their Hebrew writings,
against the Magians according to their Persian writings, against the
Greeks according to their Greek writings, and against the representa-
tives of opinion according to their terminologies. And if I silence
every group and refute its arguments, and if it abandons its views and
agrees with mine, then al-Ma'mun will know that the position that he
now occupies is not his by right, and consequently he will feel regret.
There is no power except by God the Supreme and Incomparable'.
The next morning al-Fadl b. Sahl came to us and said, 'My humble
service to you, sir. Your uncle's son is waiting for you. The people
are assembled and he did not see you as he arrived'. Al-Rida replied,
'Go on ahead, and I shall come to you, if God wills'. He made his
ablutions for prayer, and took some crushed meal drink,35 giving a
little to us. Then he proceeded, with us accompanying, and we all
entered al-Ma'mun's presence. The assembly was full of his family:
[420] Muhammad b. Ja'far36 was there among the throng of descen-
dants of Talib and Hashim, and the senior officers were in attendance.
When al-Rida entered, al-Ma'mun rose and so did Muhammad b.
Ja'far and the Hashimites. They remained standing as al-Rida sat
down with al-Ma'mun, then he bade them sit and they did so. Al-
Ma'mun paid him much attention and conversed with him for some
time.
Then al-Ma'mun turned to the Patriarch and said, 'O Patriarch, this
is may cousin, 'AIT b. Ja'far,37 a child of Fatima, daughter of our
Prophet, and son of'All b. Abl Talib. I would like you to debate with
him and present arguments to him, but proceed fairly'.
The Patriarch said: 'O Commander of the Faithful, how can I
argue with a man who will employ against me a book which I reject
and a prophet in whom I do not believe?'
35
Arabic sawiq, E/ 1 s.v. (J. Ruska).
36
The youngest son of Ja'far al-§adiq and uncle of al-Rida.
37
In the text 'All b. Musa b. Musa b. Ja'far.
67
Al-Rida said to him: 'O Christian, if I employed your Gospel
against you would you acknowledge it?'
The Patriarch: 'How could I reject what the Gospel relates, when
God himself acknowledges it whether I do or not?'
Al-Rida: 'Ask whatever you think right and take note of the reply'.
The Patriarch: 'What do you say about the prophethood of Jesus
and his Book? Do you deny anything about either?'
Al-Rida: 'I acknowledge the prophethood of Jesus, his Book,
what he proclaimed to his community, and what the disciples
acknowledged. But whoever does not acknowledge the prophethood
of Muhammad and his Book and does not proclaim it to his
community is a disbeliever in Jesus's prophethood'.

The Patriarch: 'Do you think that it will be just to fix our
judgements on the basis of witnesses?'
Al-Rida: 'Certainly'.
The Patriarch: 'Then provide two witnesses to the prophethood of
Muhammad from outside your faith, whom Christians will not reject,
and require us to do the like with people from outside our faith'.
Al-Rida: 'I will give you fairness now, O Christian. Will you not
accept from me the foremost reputable attestation to the Messiah,
Jesus son of Mary?'
The Patriarch: 'What reputable attestation is this? Tell me'.
Al-Rida: 'What do you say about Yuhanna al-Daylaml?'38
The Patriarch: 'This is excellent, excellent. You have mentioned
the man most beloved to the Messiah'.
Al-Rida: 'I entreat you to say whether the Gospel relates that
Yuhanna said, "The Messiah told me about the religion of Muhammad
the Arab, and informed me that he would come after him; I informed
the disciples about him and they believed in him"?' 39
The Patriarch: 'John did say this about the Messiah, and gave news
about the prophethood of a man, his house, and his deputed agent.
But he did not stipulate when this man would come, and did not
name to us the people so that we might recognise them'.
Al-Rida: 'So if we brought you someone who could read out the
Gospel and recite to you the reference to Muhammad, his house and
his community, would you believe in him?'
38
Although the Patriarch identifies him with the fourth evangelist,
often thought to be the beloved disciple, Yuhanna was a seventh-century
missionary in the area of the northern Tigris and Euphrates, and later on the
Persian Gulf; cf. J.M. Fiey, 'Jean de Dailam et l'imbroglio de scs fonda-
tions', Procbe-Oriettt Cbritien 10 (i960) 195-211, and S. Brock 'A Syriac Life
of John of Dailam', Parole de POrient 10 (1981-2), 123-89. He is mentioned
again on p. 421 1. 15.
39
This appears to be a confused reference to Jesus's promise of the
Paraclete in John's Gospel. The Paraclete (read asperiklutos, 'renowned') was
conventionally identified as Muhammad (Ahmad, 'celebrated', cf. sura 61.6).
68
The Patriarch: 'Definitely'.

Al-Rida said to Qustas the Greek:40 [421] 'Do you remember the
third book of the Gospel?'41
Qustas: 'None has memorized it better than I'.
Then he turned to the Exilarch and said to him: 'Do you not read
the Gospel?' The latter replied: 'Indeed'.
Al-Rida: 'Then go to the third book, and if it contains a reference
to Muhammad, his house and community, God's peace be upon
them, tell me, and if not, then do not tell me'.
Then al-Rida read out the third book until, when he reached the
reference to the Prophet, he stopped.
Then he said: 'O Christian, I ask you by the truth of the Messiah

and his mother, do you see that I know the Gospel?'
The Patriarch said: 'Yes'.
Then he recited to us the reference to Muhammad, his house and
community.
Al-Rida: 'Will you say, O Christian, that these are the words of
Jesus, son of Mary? And if you do not believe what the Gospel
relates, then you disbelieve Jesus and Moses. Should you deny this
reference then you must die, since you would reject your Lord, your
Prophet and Book'.
The Patriarch: 'I do not deny what your have pointed out to me in
the Gospel, and I acknowledge it'.
Al-Rida: 'Witness his admission'.
Then he said: 'O Patriarch, ask whatever you think appropriate'.
The Patriarch: 'Tell me about the disciples of Jesus, son of Mary.
What was their number? And how many experts of the Gospel were
there?'
Al-Rida: 'You have encountered one who knows. As for the
disciples, they were twelve men, and the best and most knowledge-
able was Aluqa;42 as for the experts of the Christians they were three
men, Yuhanna the Great in Aj, Yuhanna in Qarqislya, and Yuhanna
al-Daylaml in Zajan43 who gave the reference to the Prophet, his
40
Apart from the introduction (p. 417 1. 10), this figure appears only
here. It is not clear whether he was any more than a conventional
philosophical type. His name appears as Nustas in some mss., in 'Uyin,
129 1. 6, and in Bibar, X, 302 1. 14.
41
John's 'book' (si/r) is placed third in order of the Gospels. Cf. p. 425
1. 15, where John is mentioned third among the evangelists.
42
Luke is presumably singled out because the opening of his Gospel
suggests that it is based upon and so supersedes earlier Gospels. The form of
his name, Aluqa, which also occurs on p. 425 1. 15, could be the result of
attraction of an initial alif to give the appearance of the definite article.
43
Only the third expert, who has already been mentioned (420 1. 18), can
be identified with certainty. He was associated with a monastic foundation at
69
house and community, and who informed Jesus's community and the
people of Israel about him'. He continued, 'O Christian, by God I
believe in Jesus who believed in Muhammad, and I do not at all
disapprove of your Jesus, except for his weakness and the infrequency
of his fasting and praying'.
The Patriarch: 'You have undermined your argument, [422] and
God knows that you have weakened your position, you who thought
there was no one more expert in all Islam'.
Al-Rida: 'How can this be?'
The Patriarch: 'From your words "Your Jesus was weak and
infrequent at fasting and prayer". But Jesus never broke his fast by
day nor slept by night. He did not cease fasting throughout his life or

remaining awake at night'.
Al-Rida: 'But for whom did he fast and pray?'
The Patriarch was silent and stopped arguing.
Al-Rida: 'Christian, I will ask you a question'.
The Patriarch: 'Ask, and if I can I will give you the answer'.
Al-Rida: 'Why do you deny that it was with the help of God, great
and mighty, that Jesus revived the dead?'
The Patriarch: 'I deny this because he who revives the dead and
heals the blind and lepers is himself Lord and worthy of worship'.
Al-Rida: 'But Elisha performed similar acts to Jesus, walking on
the water, reviving the dead, healing the blind and lepers, though his
community never took him as Lord, and no one ever worshipped him
in place of God, great and mighty.44 The prophet Ezekiel performed
similar acts to Jesus son of Mary, for he revived thirty-five thousand
men sixty years after their deaths'.45
Arrajan, of which Zajan is a probable corruption (some MSS have Rajan,

and 'Uyu/t, 129 1. 20 has Rajaz). Qarqislya, the ancient Circesium, was
situated on the confluence of the Khabur and Euphrates, while Aj (some
MSS read Akh, and 'Vjun, 129 1. 19 has Bakh) may possibly be a corrupt
form of Ajaja, a settlement higher up the Khabur. According to one
tradition Arrajan, which is actually situated near the Persian Gulf, is near the
river Khizir, a tributary of the Great Zab, to the east of Mosul (Fiey, 'Jean
de Daylam', 2O2f.). So if the identifications of Qarqislya and Aj are correct,
and this location of Arrajan is accepted, it is possible that Ibn Babawayh's
source at this point may derive from traditions originating among the
Christians of northern Iraq.
44
Cf. 2 K i n g s 2 : 1 2 - 1 4 ; 4 : 5 2 - 7 ; 5 : ' M 4 -
45
Cf. Ezekiel 37:1-10. The same number of those revived, thirty-five
thousand, appears in a third century polemical work (D. Sourdel, 'Un
pamphlet musulmanc anonyme d'epoque "abbaside contre les Chretiens',
REI 34 (1966) 27 1. 23) which is probably part of a Muslim letter written
under the name of the caliph 'Umar b. 'Abd al-'AzIz by a Syrian Muslim (cf.
J. M. Gaudeul, 'The Correspondence between Leo and 'Umar: 'Umar's
7O
Then he turned to the Exilarch and said to him: 'O Exilarch, do
you detect these among the young men of Israel in the To rah? Bakht
Nasr chose them from the captives of Israel when he raided Jerusalem
and took them to Babylon.46 Then God sent Ezekiel to them and he
revived them. [423] This is in the Torah, and only an unbeliever
among you would reject it'.
The Exilarch: 'We have heard this and we know it. You have
spoken the truth'.
Al-Rida: 'Then go, O Jew, to this book of the Torah'. Al-Rida
recited for us some verses of the Torah. The Jew began to rock to
and fro at his reading and showed his amazement. Then al-Rida
turned to the Christian and said: 'O Christian, were these men before

the time of Jesus or was Jesus before them?'
The Patriarch: 'They were certainly before him'.
Al-Rida: 'The Quraysh gathered before the Messenger of God and
asked him to revive their dead for them. He sent with them 'All b.
Abl Talib, saying to him, 'Go to the cemetery and call out at the top
of your voice the names of this band about whom they have asked,
and say: O so and so, and so and so, and so and so, Muhammad the
Messenger of God says to you, Rise up with the help of God, great
and mighty'. They rose up, shaking the dust from their heads, and the
Quraysh began asking them how they were. They told them that
Muhammad had been sent as Prophet, and said, 'We would like to see
him and believe in him'.47 He healed the blind, lepers and the insane;
animals, birds, demons and devils talked to him, but we have never
regarded him as Lord in place of God, great and mighty. And we
have never denied to any of these men their excellence. But since you
accept Jesus as Lord then you must also accept Elisha and Ezekiel as
Lord, because they performed acts similar to those of Jesus in
reviving the dead.
'Further, there were thousands of obedient Israelites who fled from
their native land; they were wary of death, but God caused them to
die all at the same time. The people of that district undertook to erect
a fence around them, where they remained until their bones were
eaten away and they grew rotten. One of the prophets of Israel,
passing by, marvelled at them and the mass of rotten bones. God
spoke to him and said, 'Would you like me to revive them for you so
that you can warn them?' He said, 'Yes, O Lord'. So God, great and
mighty, inspired him to stir them. He said, 'O decayed bones, rise up
Letter Re-discovered?', Islamocbristiana 10 (1984) 109-57). The Syrian prove-

nance is striking in the light of the possibly northern traditions noted above.
46
Cf. 2 K i n g s 24 a n d 25, w h e r e N e b u c h a d n e z z a r takes thousands o f
Jewish captives to Babylon.
47
The prominence of 'All in this tradition suggests that if it is earlier
than Ibn Babawayh himself, it comes from a Shi*ite source.
71
with God's help'. They rose, all of them alive, shaking the dust [424]
from their heads.48 Furthermore, there was Abraham, the friend of
the Compassionate One, in that he took the birds and cut them up
and placed a part of them upon each mountain. Then he called to
them and they came running to him.49 Then there was Moses son of
'Imran and his companions, the seventy50 whom he chose to go with
him to the mountain. They said to him, 'You have seen God; we wish
to see him'. He replied, 'I have not seen him'. They insisted, 'We will
not believe you until we see God for ourselves'. Then a thunderbolt
struck them and burnt them up entirely, so that only Moses survived.
He cried, 'O Lord, I chose seventy men from Israel and took them
with me, but I return alone. So how will my people trust me in what

I proclaim to them? If you had willed you could have destroyed them
before,51 and will you now destroy me just like these stupid people?'
So God revived them after their deaths.52
'You cannot reject any of this that I have told you, since the Torah,
Gospel, Psalms and Furqan have declared it. So if all who have
revived the dead and healed the blind, lepers and insane are to be
taken as Lord besides God, then take all these as Lords.53 What do
you say, O Christian?' Patriarch: 'What you say is unanswerable.
There is no god but God'.
Then al-Rida turned to the Exilarch and said, 'Now, O Jew, I shall
begin to question you about the ten signs that were sent down to
Moses son of 'Imran. Have you found in the Torah a reference to
Muhammad and his community: "Behold, the last community comes
48
This is a variant of Ezekiel's miracle referred to already.
49
Cf. Genesis 15:7-11, though the correspondence is distant. The imme-
diate source is, of course, sura 2.260.
50
R e a d ashabuhu al-sab'un w i t h XJyin, 131 1. 12, a n d Bihar, X , 305 1. 2,
instead of ashabubu wa-al-sab'm in the text.
51
Read ablaktahum with 'Uyun, 131 1. 16.
52
Cf. E x o d . 2 4 : 9 - 1 1 , t h o u g h t h e i m m e d i a t e s o u r c e is Q u r ' a n , s u r a 2.5 5 f.
53
There is a long tradition in Muslim anti-Christian polemic of refuting
claims of Christ's divinity based upon his miracles by comparing them with
those of prophets. Cf. "All al-Tabarl, Kadd 'aid al-Nasara, ed. I.-A. Khalife
and W. Kutsch, in Milanges de FUniversite St. Joseph, 36 (1959) 144 1. 1-147
1. 2; Anonymous Pamphlet, 27 1. 22-28 1. 12; MaturidI, K. al-Tawbid, 211
1. 11-212 1. 10; Hasan b. Ayyub, Kadd 'ala al-Nasara, in Ibn Taymiyya, al-
Jawab al-sahib (Cairo 1905), II, 332 1. 19-335 1. 3. Other polemicists were also
aware of the traditions: cf. Jahiz, Kadd 'ala al-Nasara, ed. J. Finkel. in
Tbalatb rasa'il H-AbT Utbmdn ... al-Jahi^ (Cairo 1926), 12 11. ij(.; Abu 'Isa al-
Warraq, Kadd, 31, para, viii, 33 f., para, xi; 'Abd al-Jabbar, Mugbni, V, ed.
M. Khudayri (Cairo 1958), 118 11. 6-11, 123 1. 14-124 1. 17, 135 11. 4-11, etc.
72
following the rider on the camel, praising the Lord greatly with a new
song in new congregations. Let the children of Israel heed them and
let their hearts find rest in their king. In their hands are swords, with
which they will have revenge on the unbelieving nations in the
regions of the earth"?54 Is this written thus in the Torah?'
The Exilarch: 'Yes, we find it thus'.
Then he said to the Patriarch: 'O Christian, what is your knowl-
edge of the Book of Isaiah?'
He replied: '1 know it letter by letter'.
Al-Rida said to them both: 'Do you know this from among its
utterances: "O people, I see the form of the rider on the ass clothed
in a raiment of light, and I see the rider on the camel with a

brightness like that of the moon"?''
They replied: 'Isaiah said this'.
Al-Rida continued: 'Do you know the words of Jesus in the
Gospel: "I [425] am going to my Lord and your Lord, and the
Paraclete will come. He it is who will witness to me about the truth as
I have witnessed to him, and he it is who will explain to you
everything; he it is who will expose the evil deeds of the peoples, and
he it is who will shatter the designs of the unbelievers"?'56
The Patriarch said: 'You have not said anything that is in the
Gospel except what we read there'.
He said: 'Do you definitely find this in the Gospel, O Patriarch?'
The Christian replied: 'Yes'.
Al-Rida went on: 'Now come, O Patriarch, tell me about the first
Gospel: when did you lose it; with whom did you find it; and who
set down this present Gospel for you?'
The Patriarch: 'We only lost the Gospel for one day, then we
discovered it fresh and new: John and Matthew gave it to us'.
54
This is a combination of the allusion to the riders on camels in Isa.
21:7 and verses from Ps. 149 which have been subdy altered to emphasize
the spiritual and martial superiority of those who follow the rider. Cf. the
discussion below.
55
Cf. Isa. 21:7. It is close to the Peshitta version, which refers to a single
pair of riders. The verse was well-known in polemic as early as the debate
between the Patriarch Timothy and the Caliph al-Mahdl (ed. A. Mingana,
"The Apology of Timothy the Patriarch before the Caliph Mahdl, BJRL 12
(1928) 137-298), both of whom were aware of the identification of the riders
as Jesus and Muhammad, see pp. 173-5. Among later writers who knew it
were 'All al-Tabarl and al-Biriinl (refs. in G. von Grunebaum, Medieval Islam
(Chicago 1953), i7f.). It was also employed by Jewish apologists; cf.
B. Lewis, 'An Apocalyptic Vision of Islamic History', BSOAS 13 (1950)
308-38, esp. 313 and commentary. None of these is as free as the version
given in the text.
54
This is a blend of John zo: 17b and the three references to the
Paraclete, John 14:26, 15:26^, and 16:5-8.
73
Al-Rida: 'You scarcely seem to know about the traditions57 of the

Gospel and its experts. If it were as you claim, why do you differ from
them over the Gospel — for the variations are there in the Gospel
which you possess today - if you did not differ over it in the first
years? But my knowledge about this is greater than yours. I know
that when the first Gospel was lost the Christians met together with
their experts and said to them: 'Jesus son of Mary has been killed and
we have lost the Gospel. You are the experts, so what can you do?'
Luke and Mark said to them: 'The Gospel is in our hearts and we will
produce it for you book by book, every one. Do not grieve over it or
leave the churches, for we will recite it to you, each and every book,
until we have brought it together for you completely'. So Luke,

Mark, John and Matthew58 sat down and wrote for you59 this Gospel
after you had lost the first Gospel. But these four were disciples of the
first disciples. Did you .know that?' 60 The Patriarch said: 'I did not
know this, but I know it now. The matter of the Gospel has become
clear to me, thanks to your knowledge, and my heart confirms to me
that the things I have heard, and about which you have full
knowledge, [426] are true. I ask for further understanding'.61
Al-Rida asked him: 'What, as you see it, is the value of these men's
witness?'
He answered: 'It is acceptable. For they are the experts of the
Gospel and everything they witness to is truth'.
Al-Rida said to al-Ma'mun, his attendants, his relatives and the
others: 'Mark what he has said'.
They replied: 'We have done so'.
Then he said to the Patriarch: 'About the true nature of the Son
and his mother, did you know that Matthew said: The Messiah is son
of David, son of Abraham, son of Isaac, son of Jacob, son of Judah,
son of Hadrun?62 And Mark said about the lineage of Jesus son of
57
Better sense is given by reading sinan, in 'Uyun, 132 1. 16, than sirr in
the text ( t h o u g h Bibdr, X , 306 1. 7 also has sirr).
58
I n t h e original, Aluqd wa-Marqdbus wa-Yubannd wa-Mattd.
59
Read lakum with 'Uyun, 132 1. 23, a n d Bibdr, X , 306 1. 14, instead of
labum in t h e text.
60
T h i s contradicts w h a t ' A l l says earlier, 421 11. 13 f., that L u k e was the
best of t h e original twelve disciples.
61
T h i s account of h o w the original injil was replaced by the versions of
the four evangelists parallels those given by ' A b d al-Jabbar in Mttgbnl, V ,
143 11. 2-8, a n d Tatbbit dala'ilal-nubuva, 152 1. 6-155 1- '&, a l t h o u g h there is
n o o b v i o u s dependence. Cf. the earlier reference in Jahiz, Kadd, 24 11. 8-20,
which shows awareness of the same underlying tradition. There is nothing
in Ibn Babawayh's account that could not have been based on the two
widely known facts that the injil of Jesus was lost and that there were four
extant Gospels.
62
Cf. Matt. 1:1-17, exp. 2f. I b n Babawayh reverses the o r d e r from
Abraham on.
74
Mary: He is the Word of God which he made to dwell in the body of

a human being and it became man.63 Luke said: Jesus son of Mary
and his mother were human, flesh and blood, and the Holy Spirit
entered them.64 Then, indeed, you have to explain Jesus's own
witness: Truly I say to you, my band of followers, only he who has
come from heaven will go up to heaven, only the rider on the camel,
seal of the prophets, for he ascends to heaven and descends.65 What
do you say about this?'
The Patriarch said: 'These are Jesus's words, we do not deny it'.
Al-Rida continued: 'What do you say about the witnesses of Luke,
Mark and Matthew about Jesus, and the ancestry they give him?'
The Patriarch replied: 'They lied about Jesus'.

Al-Rida said: 'O People, has he not [427] declared them honest,
and said they are experts on the Gospel and their word is true?'
The Patriarch said: 'O most expert of the Muslims, please excuse
me for what I said about them'.
Al-Rida answered: 'Readily. Now, O Christian, ask me about
anything else that occurs to you'.
The Patriarch concluded: 'Let another put questions to you. I
myself had no idea there was anyone like you among the experts of
the Muslims'.
The date of this encounter can be given with some accuracy
because Ibn Babawayh reports that it took place just after 'All
al-Rida had come to join al-Ma'mun (p. 418 11. 2f.). 'AH was
declared heir to the throne in Ramadan 201/March-April 817 on
his arrival from Medina at Merv, where the caliph was estab-
lished. The debate must have taken place between this date and,
at the latest, the middle of 202/early 818 when al-Ma'mun
moved against insurrectionists in Iraq. Al-Ma'mun was well-
known for the religious debates at which he presided, 66 and it is
understandable that in convening this he should wish both to
test the claims made for 'AlTs inspired knowledge and to
demonstrate the appropriateness of his choice as successor.
However, reservations must be expressed here, as with the
previous interchange, over the historicity of the encounter. For
the Patriarch appears little more than a literary device whose
63
Cf. Mark 1:10, though it is closer to John 1:14.
" Cf. Luke 1:35.
65
Cf. John 3:13 with the addition of Isa. 21:7.
66
Cf. A. Abel, 'Masques et visages dans la polemique islamo-chretienne',
Tavola rotonda sul tema: Cbristianesimo e Islamismo, Roma, 17-18 Aprilt, 1972
(Rome 1974), 85-131, who suggests that he became a conventional figure in
polemical literature, esp. 103-13.
75
ignorance of the Bible and Christian doctrine simply emphasize

"Airs theological prowess. 'All himself is endowed with
superhuman knowledge and powers of memory that are less
likely innate than the product of later imaginations. The whole
setting has an artificial, dramatic quality, intended to portray the
imam's inspired status, and seems too heightened to be real.
Throughout, Ibn Babawayh's main intention is the same as
before, to demonstrate the impressiveness of the imam both as
debater and as repository of inspired knowledge.
As in the earlier chapter, certain features appear to derive
from the tradition of anti-Christian polemic. Some of these,

such as the comparison between the miracles of Jesus and of
other prophets (pp. 422 11. 6ff.), the identification of the
Paraclete with Muhammad (p. 421 11. 2-6) and the story of the
origin of the four Gospels (p. 425 11. 5—17) are familiar elements
of polemical works in the early centuries of Islam.67 Ibn
Babawayh would thus have had access to them from a wide
range of written and oral sources. Others are rather less
common, and suggest a more direct connection with particular
lines of tradition. The reference to Yuhanna al-Daylaml and the
other two Yuhannas (pp. 420 1. 18, 423 11. i4f.) indicate that
Ibn Babawayh had some knowledge of narratives possibly
connected with early Syrian Christianity, though his confusion
of Yuhanna for John the evangelist shows that his knowledge
was superficial. Similarly, his assertion that Luke was the best
and most learned of Jesus's disciples (p. 421 11. 13 f.) suggests a
tradition that was definite but also remote from Christianity.
Two Biblical quotations, however, indicate a close connection
with Christian tradition and a sophisticated adaptation of the
text; they contrast strikingly with these other less accurate
allusions.
The two quotations occur in close proximity. The first
consists of selected verses from Ps. 149 together with a refer-
ence to Isa. 21:7:
Behold the last community (umma) comes
following the rider on the camel.
They praise the Lord greatly
with a new song in the new congregations {al-kand'is);
Let the children of Israel heed them
and let their hearts find rest in their king.
67
For references cf. nn. 53, 39, and 61 respectively.
76
In their hands are swords

with which they will have revenge on the unbelieving
nations in the regions of the earth (p. 424 11. 15-17).
The first line is introductory and the second the reference to
Isaiah. The rest corresponds closely to verses of Ps. 149:
1. Praise the lord!
Sing to the Lord a new song,
his praise in the assembly of the faithful!
2. Let Israel be glad in his Maker
let the sons of Zion rejoice in their King!
6b. (Let) two-edged swords (be) in their hands

7. to wreak vengeance on the nations
and chastisement on the peoples.
The insertion of 'unbelieving' into the Arabic equivalent of v. 7
shows that the adapter was a Muslim who, from the introduc-
tory line, accepted that Muhammad was the seal of the prophets
and his community the final and perfect society. He found it
natural, however, to use the word kamsa for Muslim gatherings
although it was normally reserved for Christian and Jewish
places of worship. 68 And he was sufficiently intimate with the
text of the Psalm to select the most suitable verses and to make
minimal alterations where necessary.69 He could, therefore, have
been a convert to Islam who used his Biblical knowledge in the
service of his new faith.
The second quotation consists of verses from the Gospel of
John:
I am going to my Lord and your Lord
and the Paraclete will come.
He it is who will witness to me about the truth as I have witnessed
to him,
and he it is who will explain everything to you;
he it is who will expose the evil deeds of the peoples,
and he it is who will shatter the designs of the unbelievers (pp. 424
1. 22-425 1. 3).
The first line is a direct translation of John 20:17b, though it
may also contain a reference to one of the Paraclete verses, as
follows:
68
Cf. 425 1. 14, where kamsa is used in a Christian context.
69
'All al-Tabarl, K. al-Din wa-al-dawla, ed. A. Mingana (Manchester
1923), 78 11. 3-13, also employs the psalm, but quotes it intact.
77
16:5a Now I am going to him who sent me
16:7 (It is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go
away the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will
send him to you.)
15:26a But when the Paraclete comes ...
15:26c he will bear witness to me;
15:27 and you also are witnesses, because you have been with me
from the beginning.
16:13a (When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all
truth)
14:26b He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance
all that I have said to you.

16:8 He will convince the world of sin and of righteousness and of
judgement.
The last line cannot be fitted into these Johannine verses and
most readily recalls the line from the Magnificat 'He has
scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts' (Luke
1:51).
This quotation differs from the other in that it is not so much
an edited passage as a network of allusions from the Paraclete
verses (John i4.:i6f., 26; iy.z6{.; 16:7-14) put together from
memory by someone to whom they were intimately familiar.
The last line repeats the sense of the ending of the previous
quotations and suggests the same Muslim mind at work.
It would seem that Ibn Babawayh's source, at this point at
least, was a Muslim who may originally have been a Christian.
He used his knowledge of the Bible in the same way as the
earlier converts 'All b. Rabban al-Tabarl and al-Hasan b.
Ayyiib70 to give what appeared to be predictions of Muhammad
and the coming of his community. He must have intended
his quotations for an audience that did not have thorough
knowledge of the texts he presents, since he could not have
otherwise hoped to have his alterations and interpolations
accepted.
Indications in the text suggest that these rather subtle and
accurate references to Christian tradition may occur in a section
that was not an original part of the dialogue. The strongest
indication of a break comes at p. 424 1. 12, where at the end of
the long comparison between the miracles of Jesus and other
prophets, al-Rida forces the Christian to admit that the miracles
70
Cf. Tabarl, K. ai-Din wa-al-dawla, and Radd 'ala aJ-Nasara; Hasan b.
Ayyub, Radd 'aid al-Nafara.
78
are not guarantees of Jesus's divinity and to exclaim 'It is as you

say, and there is no god but God'. This appears to be a
capitulation and even a sign of conversion. Then, as though
starting a new conversation, al-Rida turns to the Jewish leader
and tells him that he will begin his dialogue with him by asking
about the miracles of Moses. But suddenly he switches back to
Christian themes and asks the Exilarch to verify his recitation
from Isaiah. If he wished simply to enlist the Exilarch's help in
quoting from the Bible, it is strange that he should mention the
next dialogue without going on to it. The interruption could
have occurred because Ibn Babawayh wished to insert some

convincing arguments he had come across after composing the
dialogue between al-Rida and the Patriarch.
A second indication of different material is given by the slight
contradictions between this and the earlier parts, in that here
Luke is explicitly excluded from the original disciples (p. 425
11. i6f.) whereas there he is called the most expert and best
(p. 421 11. 13 f.); here the Paraclete verses from John are clearly
quoted (pp. 424 1. 22—425 1. 3), whereas there, although they are
referred to and al-Rida is reported as quoting them (p. 421
11. 2-6), they are not actually given.
Lastly, and continuing this point, the material in this section
differs in character from the earlier arguments. It comprises the
first quotation discussed above, followed by a direct reference
to the rider on the ass and the rider on the camel, then the
second quotation, the description of how the Gospels origi-
nated, and lastly comments about the evangelists' witness to
Jesus's humanity (pp. 424 1. 13-427 1. 2). All of these demon-
strate specific knowledge of the Bible and Christian history that
is singularly lacking in the earlier parts, in that they provide
actual references to texts and facts. The quotations also dovetail
easily together, since the first two contain mentions of the rider
on the camel (p. 424 11. 15, 2of.) and the third repeats the theme
of the first that the last community, or the Comforter, will
vindicate God against unbelievers (pp. 424 1. 17, 424 1. 20 f.). As
a result of this repetition of allusions inserted into the original
quotations, they seem to form a literary unit which in all
probability existed before Ibn Babawayh found it.
A common feature of this literary unit and the often less
pointed arguments that occur earlier in the dialogue is that
they are all subordinated to Ibn Babawayh's main purpose of
demonstrating 'All al-Rida's superhuman knowledge. Thus it
79
might be suspected that they have all been chosen or changed in

order to assist this aim rather than for any value they may have
as points against Christian beliefs. For this reason, the dialogue
has only an indirect relationship with the Muslim polemical
tradition. It certainly contains many arguments that occur in
other works, but they are used here for internal Muslim
debating purposes rather than the original purpose of attacking
Christianity. In these circumstances it is impossible to guess at
their origins, but reasonably safe to say that Ibn Babawayh is
mainly responsible for bringing them together and constructing
the dialogue.

The conclusion to which one is led by discussion of this and
the other dialogue is that neither stands as an authentic record
of early exchanges between Muslims and Christians. While their
contents mirror early forms of debate, they cannot themselves
be used to understand any further what these were. Rather,
their main value lies in their witness to the concern to substan-
tiate the claims made for the imams. As such they are subtly
constructed and entertaining examples of the Shfite endeavour
to secure the group's position within the Muslim intellectual
community.
80

Two Muslim-Christian Debates From The Early Shl'Ite Tradition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Two Muslim-Christian Debates From The Early Shl'Ite Tradition

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Two Muslim-Christian Debates From The Early Shl'Ite Tradition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Semitic Studies XXX1II// Spring

TWO MUSLIM-CHRISTIAN DEBATES

The Kitdb al-Tawhid of Abu Ja'far Muhammad b. 'All Ibn

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

them imams appear as inspired figures: in the first as the ultimate

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Yunus b. 'Abd al-Rahman said, Hisham said to me: While I was

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Bariha: '"The Father" is a name and "the Son" is a name by which

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Christians believe is acceptable by citing a majority belief different from

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Everyone who challenges him about his ancestry finds that he is

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Bariha answered: 'No one has more thorough knowledge of this

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Babawayh portrays him as a shopkeeper and teacher of the

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

the reign of the caliph al-Ma'mun.22 This individual could not,

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

silent outside Hisham's shop, Hisham's jocularity, and the final

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

He continues: And the Son, is there no son to him? They reply:

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

None of these features is a decisive proof of earliness. They

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

The Patriarch: 'Definitely'.

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Arrajan, of which Zajan is a probable corruption (some MSS have Rajan,

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Letter Re-discovered?', Islamocbristiana 10 (1984) 109-57). The Syrian prove-

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Al-Rida: 'You scarcely seem to know about the traditions57 of the

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Mary: He is the Word of God which he made to dwell in the body of

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

ignorance of the Bible and Christian doctrine simply emphasize

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

In their hands are swords

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

are not guarantees of Jesus's divinity and to exclaim 'It is as you

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

might be suspected that they have all been chosen or changed in

Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Nottingham on June 27, 2015

You might also like